Publication Ethics

Statement of Publication Ethics

INTAN-HANDIL 2026 is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices.

The Editorial Board is responsible for preventing publication malpractice. Unethical behavior is unacceptable, and INTAN-HANDIL 2026 does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors who submit articles to the Conference Proceedings affirm that manuscript contents are original. Furthermore, authors' submission also implies that the manuscript has not been published previously in any language, either fully or partly, and is not currently submitted for publication elsewhere.

Editors, authors, and reviewers within INTAN-HANDIL 2026 are fully committed to good publication practice and accept the responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as set by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors .

Publication and Authorship

All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-review process by at least two international reviewers who are experts in the area of the particular paper.
The factors taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.
The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
No research can be included in more than one publication.

Editors' Responsibilities

Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject or accept an article.
Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
Editors should have a clear picture of a research's funding sources.
Editors should base their decisions solely on the papers' importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the publication's scope.
Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.
Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members.
Editors ensure that the submitted full papers are reviewed without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

Authors' Responsibilities

Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
Authors must participate in the peer review process.
Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
All authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors.

Reviewers' Responsibilities

Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
Reviewers should not have conflicts of interest with respect to the research, the authors, or the research funders.
Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts objectively and provide constructive feedback.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
Reviewers should inform the editor of any similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Reviewers should not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the express written consent of the author.

Peer-Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to INTAN-HANDIL 2026 will go through an initial review process by the Scientific Committee (Editors) of the conference. Based on the initial review results, a manuscript may be rejected or returned for revision. Once reviewed by the conference's editors, the manuscript will go through a blind review process by reviewers of experts, who will provide recommendations on the manuscript.

The INTAN-HANDIL 2026 committee is committed to ensuring the reviewers are suitable and qualified experts, who will adhere to the required standards and norms of academic peer-review. The review process is conducted in a double-blind review process, so that the authors and reviewers do not know the identity of each other to ensure the objectivity and quality of the review results. Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the editor will make a decision whether a manuscript will be accepted without revision, with minor revision, with major revision, or rejected.

We invite all our partners to be highly vigilant on the quality of the articles selected and the peer-review process. Articles must fulfil the following criteria:

Article & Reference Criteria

A Articles

Good scientific quality.
Peer-reviewed by at least one expert in the field.
Strictly in the scope of the conference.
Written in proper English; the abstract and title present key information about the subject and include important keywords.
Include various international collaborations.
Longer than an abstract or a short report (3–4 pages minimum) – there is no maximum limit of pages.
Checked in a plagiarism tool (this service is provided if you opt for our submission tool). Determining acceptable levels of plagiarism/duplication: see COPE advice on https://publicationethics.org/cope-positions#plagiarism.

B References

The article must contain timely, accurate, and relevant references. Ensure that a set of references doesn't excessively point to the same author(s) or the same publication with the intention to artificially increase the citations of certain authors. This precaution applies to a single article or a series of articles. Our team will carry out additional checks to eliminate any risk of citation manipulation that could affect the integrity and image of the conference.

Examples for Journal Articles

Example 1 A. Nicolas, J.-L. Barrat, J. Rottler, Effects of inertia on the steady-shear rheology of disordered solids. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 058303 (2016)

Example 2 (with DOI) A. Lohrasebi, T. Koslowski, Modeling water purification by an aquaporin-inspired graphene-based nano-channel. J. Mol. Model. 25, 280 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00894-019-4160-γ

If available, author(s) must add the DOI number of the article.
References must contain the full title of the cited article.
A maximum of 15 references per article is allowed, with only a maximum of 3 citations to proceedings articles (this rule does not apply to EPJ WOC). Please note that articles exceeding this quota can be excluded from the publication by the production team.

Plagiarism Check

Plagiarism / Similarity Check

Before commencing the review process, all submitted manuscripts will be checked for plagiarism/similarity by the INTAN-HANDIL 2026 committee. This will be done with a plagiarism/similarity checking tool of Turnitin. Only articles with a similarity index below 25% are tolerated.

Selection Criteria

Reviewers were instructed to assess the quality of submissions solely based on the academic merit of their content along the following dimensions:

Topic Relevance — how the topic discussed in the paper relates to the scope/theme of the Conference.
Originality / Novelty — to what extent the topic is original or the paper suggests novelty.
Depth of Analysis — to what extent the authors analyze the research findings.
Significance — how the paper contributes to the field.
Methodology — how the methodology used by the author is relevant to the proposed aims and results in good findings.